New TC Powercore and sofware...can we expect a MD4 for powercore ?

[Lion]

Hi,

i've just see on the TC website :
- new software for TC Powercore
- new Powercore interface (with more DSP)

Can we expect a MD4 for Powercore ?
I think it would be great...I think it could be a good improvement for TC and us to make a MD4 (and all the TC M6000 FX) for Powercore because there is not any solution between TC M6000 and Powercore and if you want MD4 you have to go to M6000 system which is cost a lot of money...

WE WANT MD4 FOR POWERCORE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lionel


P.S : The last production : The new album of Massilia Sound System is out since the 1 october if you can listen and like it or hate it let me know, any feedback is welcome...

[NoodlinXavier]

Originally Posted by Lion

Hi,
WE WANT MD4 FOR POWERCORE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1++

[lukejs]

NO WAY !! In the last 2 years, TC went from doubling and now , cuadrupling , the dsp in the Powercore !!! My uad1 card...just ain´t enough.... please tell Universal Audio to do the same for the UAD1 !!!!!!!!!!!

[AlphaDingo]

quadrupling the firewire version. They don't say how it compare to the pci mk2 version.

[lukejs]

Originally Posted by AlphaDingo

quadrupling the firewire version. They don't say how it compare to the pci mk2 version.

WOW ! it it´s cuadruple the power of the firewire version, then it´s 8 times the power of the pci element !!! As I recall , the firewire version was double the dsp power of the Powercore Element.

[AlphaDingo]

That is pretty sweet. Yeah UA should take note. I hope they get through their stock of the cards soon so they HAVE to do something else.

[rapfreak]

If I remember correctly the firewire was 1.5 or 2 times the original PCI version. The Mk2 version is the same power as the firewire version.

[F5D]

The original powercore PCI / Element use 4x 100MHz DSPs whereas the Powercore Firewire/PCI mk2/Express use 4x 150MHz DSPs. So, these 150MHz devices are 1.5x more powerful, however they also have more RAM per DSP, so you can run more RAM-heavy plugins with them. The new X8 is basically like 2 poco firewires (8x 150MHz DSPs) in one rack enclosure, so it is 2 times as fast as poco firewire and 3 times as fast as poco pci/element. If you use only plugins which need a lot of DSP's own RAM, the x8 can basically run 4 times as much plugins as a poco pci/element.

I just hope that they have managed to write the driver well. There have been some problems with the original poco firewire and some firewire chipsets but mostly if you use a windows pc. For example I had huge problems earlier with a poco firewire + pc but now I have a g5 mac and the poco firewire works flawlessly. The new X8 looks really nice. I like the black color. Anyway, I very rarely need more Powercore DSP power than 1 poco firewire can offer so I will probably not switch quite yet. Anyway, I bet the X8 will be a great product.

[gsqd]

Great news. Makes that Tube Tech comp a real possibility with all that new power!

[peeder]

Originally Posted by gsqd

Great news. Makes that Tube Tech comp a real possibility with all that new power!

I thought the tc system had an architectural limitation due to the partitioning of the DSP. The plugs can't run on more than one DSP simultaneously, and this x8 has eight of them, meaning a given plugin can only use 1/8th of its power for each channel. I could be wrong about that, but it's been touted as an advantage of the unpartitioned UAD system.

[gsqd]

Originally Posted by peeder

I thought the tc system had an architectural limitation due to the partitioning of the DSP. The plugs can't run on more than one DSP simultaneously, and this x8 has eight of them, meaning a given plugin can only use 1/8th of its power for each channel. I could be wrong about that, but it's been touted as an advantage of the unpartitioned UAD system.

I don't know the technicalities of the way the DSP is proportioned but I do know that the Tube Tech comp uses 1 DSP for 2 instances at 44.1 stereo. So 8 DSP's is a very nice power base for it and those wonderful 6000 verbs.

GM

[F5D]

Originally Posted by peeder

I thought the tc system had an architectural limitation due to the partitioning of the DSP. The plugs can't run on more than one DSP simultaneously, and this x8 has eight of them, meaning a given plugin can only use 1/8th of its power for each channel. I could be wrong about that, but it's been touted as an advantage of the unpartitioned UAD system.

Well, a 150MHz motorola DSP can run a very heavy plugin, so it is maybe not a problem that you cannot split 1 plugin to run on 2 DSPs for example. However, the problem with the powercore is that you very rarely can load the DSPs full because different plugins need different amounts of DSP. You can end up with a load like this: DSP1: 89%, DSP2: 94%, DSP3: 100%, DSP4: 86%. So, some of the dsp power cannot be used. A UAD1 uses only 1 DSP so it doesn't suffer from this kind of problem but imo a powercore with 150MHz DSPs can run more plugins of the same quality. For example powercore firewire/pci mk2/express can run 8 VSS3 plugins which are imo alot better than plate 140 and a UAD1 can run only 4 plate 140 plugins. Of course it depends on the plugins which you use but powercore still seems to be more powerful.

IMO UA must do something similar to what TC has done now. It they don't want/can't use faster DSP chips, they must put 2 chips on the same card or build an external 1u rack enclosure with 4 UAD1s inside.